WoWAce to close its doors (sort of)

◊ Malan · 07/22/08, 5:48 PM

WowAce's Plans for the Future

From what I gather:

files.wowace.com is being shut down. WoWAceUpdater, MacAceUpdater and JavaAceUpdater will no longer have access to those files.
The SVN repository is being made developer only so that you can cheat the system by pulling off the SVN (I think that's what Funkydude's comment on page 2 in that thread indicates)
A new "CurseForge.com" site will provide a new development project management scheme for developers who will then have to release mods to addon sites such as Curse, WoWInterface, etc in order for the public to use it

I know there are a lot of Ace developers (funkydude included) who read this forum, can you guys comment on this, clarify any of the above? What does this mean for the addon community? What impact is this going to have on addons that have been "in beta" for their entire lifespan, never being published to a release site?

[Attempt at Humor]Is this like the time Napster closed? Should I download as many addons as possible before it closes?

Saroz · 07/22/08, 6:51 PM

It's pretty much all explained in the thread you linked.

An IRC log with questions and answers can be found here: WowAce's Plans for the Future

It's basically gonna be the end of the wowaceupdater, and in the future you get your ace addons from the Curse Client (which will be redone). Alpha releases won't be available from the client, but beta and final releases will.

Basically it should result in more stable mods getting to the "end users", by keeping alpha stuff only the SVN only.

All mods from WoWAce will be found on the new site, even if they don't have an active author, so no mods will disappear.

shorto85 · 07/22/08, 6:54 PM

Kaelten also mentioned the Curse updater tool being redone to include all of the WowAce content. However it seems that the "one click update" that so many of us have been spoiled by from using WAU will be a premium feature.

• koaschten · 07/22/08, 7:07 PM

The point is, the backend is already running on curse.com servers. Kaelten would have a big hole in his pockets by now. He mentioned traffic in the regions of 30-60 TERABYTE a month only for files.wowace.com and easily capping a Gbit link on patchdays. With Kaelten and ckknight being associateed with curse.com and coding for them being able to consolidate the front end and streamline it you can only gain from the synergies. Sure i will miss the 1-click update too but lets be honest, would you want to provide free service to 5-10 Mio. customers for free and pay on top only because something that was planned as a development platform was "too open" ?
I can understand the movement and gladly will pay for premium if its a "reasonable" amount.

Nadiar · 07/22/08, 7:09 PM

The problem with WAU was twofold:
1) No programmers of sufficient skill were willing to work on creating a high quality.
2) Several Developers were using it incorrectly.

While the first problem is something that would need to be corrected, the second problem is only due to the approach they were using, but even a successful correction would need to force them to properly tag their AddOns as Alpha, Beta, or Release.

For advertisements, there were multiple situations in which the WAU ads were 'infected' with other advertisements, or actually infected with trojans, which points to a failure in the model used for monetary support.

I'm sure they have some form of analysis on where their bandwidth was going, but from what I understand, an incredible source of bandwidth was spent only on updating the WAU index. The index was a completely horrible method of accessing it. It should have been reintegrated as a sql query, showing only the updates from the last updated local index.

I'm also reasonably certain that their SVN should be able to determine all of the updated files from their last download, and package only the updates files together, which would have drastically saved on bandwidth (since users would likely be downloading a 10k compressed Lua file instead of 3MB files full of images and static data files).

Next, I would have programmed in the ability to publish any 'release' quality update to WoWInterface and Curse, directly from a web interface for the Developers. This reduces the reliance on using WowAce for distribution, and removes part of the laziness barrier that seems prevelent in many of the Developers.

Honestly, the entire beauty of WowAce has now been completely removed. AddOn developers left to their own devices won't follow any revision control procedures, which is something that WowAce forced on developers. All of the other benefits of WowAce were incidental. Memory and CPU utilization were not always true, and the ease with which a Developer could be replaced on any specific AddOn was indeed much smoother than the alternatives on Curse and WowInterface (which created situations where we had several terms such as Reborn, Renewed, Refreshed, 2.0, or II, all in circulation simultaneously).

◊ Malan · 07/22/08, 7:58 PM

Originally Posted by Saroz

and in the future you get your ace addons from the Curse Client (which will be redone).

Is that planned to be java based for multi platform compatibility? (Mac user here)

Saroz · 07/22/08, 8:07 PM

Originally Posted by Nadiar

AddOn developers left to their own devices won't follow any revision control procedures, which is something that WowAce forced on developers.

WoWace never forced revision control procedures, thats part of the "problem" - all code just popped into trunk, beta, alpha and final versions, sometimes it broke, noone could ever tell. Noone uses SVN tags and virtually noone uses brances, save for "WoTLK" stuff. Personally I don't think it's a bad thing, at all. As a developer, you simply commit your fix to wowace SVN, and you know people will get it, now you have to push a bugfix release and stuff from a webinterface. Guess we'll see how it all works out.

Originally Posted by Malan

Is that planned to be java based for multi platform compatibility? (Mac user here)

Sorry I have no idea.

shorto85 · 07/22/08, 8:27 PM

Originally Posted by Malan

Is that planned to be java based for multi platform compatibility? (Mac user here)

I recall seeing something in the thread over on the wowace forums about the new updater being ported for Macs.

Nadiar · 07/22/08, 8:43 PM

Originally Posted by Saroz

WoWace never forced revision control procedures, thats part of the "problem" - all code just popped into trunk, beta, alpha and final versions, sometimes it broke, noone could ever tell. Noone uses SVN tags and virtually noone uses brances, save for "WoTLK" stuff. Personally I don't think it's a bad thing, at all. As a developer, you simply commit your fix to wowace SVN, and you know people will get it, now you have to push a bugfix release and stuff from a webinterface. Guess we'll see how it all works out.

Thats what I get for typing things up while at work. They're not enforcing much revision control, but they do retain a historic set of revisions, which can be reverted to when the developers make a mistake, and /generally/ changes made at least have an attempt at documentation. This is as opposed to just tossing them up on a website somewhere, with the potential to lose all changes after each update.

ckknight · 07/22/08, 8:53 PM

The new client is written in C++ and wxWidgets, so yes, there will be a Mac version.

If there is enough demand, a Linux version may also be created.

Kaganar · 07/23/08, 4:31 AM

Damn -- as a Linux user, I hope it will be :-) If it's really being written in wx, porting should be nearly trivial though, as long as they don't use every MS library under the sun to contact servers, read out files... etc. Are they considering open-sourcing it? If so, and a Linux port isn't a priority, I'd me more than happy to do it for them.

• koaschten · 07/23/08, 7:28 AM

I doubt you will see the source of any updater from curse, it would punch a big hole in the mod downloading api, which would be open then again for other updaters, as they could just pretend to be the curse updater but allow one-button downloading again.

• Eradin · 07/23/08, 1:23 PM

Any ideas if WUU (WoW UI Updater, http://wuu.vagabonds.info/) will still function? As it stands right now it can update from Curse, so I'm guessing if the stable addons will end up propagating to Curse that its functionality will remain intact.

Calen · 07/23/08, 2:19 PM

From the log of the IRC discussion

<@Kaelten> "Curseforge client? Or Curse? And what will be the specific differences between the free & pay clients?"
<kolie> Basically the client operates in two modes, premium and non premium.
<kolie> Ill describe ie for addon managment
<kolie> The addon manager periodically will check its installed addon feeds for updates
<kolie> Once at startup, then once every hour
<kolie> The distinction between premium and non premium is what happens when it sees a updated addon.
<kolie> For non premium users, the installed addons screen will get a green arrow next to its name.
<kolie> For premium users the package updates immediatly.
<@nevcairiel> Can toggle automated updates off?
<kolie> To update your addon as a non premium user, you have to click teh addon, and click update addon.

I'm sure I saw a post from one of the curse employees suggesting that they will do everything possible to insure that only their downloader is functional; unsurprising as they intend to leverage their client for either direct profit (premium subscription) or ad revenue.

I rather abhor the thought of running their downloader client for a few reasons..

1) It's going to feature embedded advertising, which often includes the possibility of remote exploits (both WAU and the Curse website itself have both been documented as spreading trojans, in the past).

2) It's designed to run as a background process, for automatic updates which leaves me wondering what other kind of activity they will be logging. Even if it's just logging your play time indirectly by detecting when the wow client is active, I will be irritated. The client is closed source, and only available as a binary, further reducing my interest in running it..

3) I'd consider paying for a premium client if I could think of a way of paying the people at curse without giving them any kind of personal data, credit card numbers etc.

No offense intended to those that are involved with curse.com development.. but as a professional programmer I am inherently suspicious of the security practices of a hobby site/portal gone commercial, and given their past history for both design, content and security practices I'm certainly not going to be an early subscriber.

Personally, I'm not too concerned - I will still be able to update my addons, in one way or the other, but for some of my raid members that are reliant on updaters I loathe the upcoming changes.

• Glaurong · 07/23/08, 2:36 PM

Originally Posted by Calen

Personally, I'm not too concerned - I will still be able to update my addons, in one way or the other, but for some of my raid members that are reliant on updaters I loathe the upcoming changes.

Yeah, I feel the same way. I've kind of been the gateway for mods/wowace/WAU for my group of friends that plays wow. I suspect I'll end up going back to the old way I did things, finding/testing/downloading/hosting mods for them.

More work for me but I suspect we will be better off for it. The amount of bloat that has creeped into my UI as a result of easy updating is pretty obscene. Time to trim it all down/consolidate so updating won't be a nightmare!

Calen · 07/23/08, 2:54 PM

Originally Posted by Glaurong

I suspect I'll end up going back to the old way I did things, finding/testing/downloading/hosting mods for them.

One of the displeasing changes in my mind is that with the 'author rewards' program that Curse will be providing, addon authors that embrace the wowace->curse transition will want to be rewarded.. which is to say, they will want to have as many downloads of their addons happen directly from Curse.com so they benefit.

To that end, I expect that most these authors will request that their addons are never re-hosted anywhere else, period. It seems unlikely that there will be any serious repercussions for someone in your (or my) situation, where we might want to provide a more private download source for the addons we recommend, but I don't feel very happy about the idea of going against the authors wishes, or being tied to curse as the only source for addons, given possible uptime issues, etc etc.

Don't get me wrong - I see no problem with authors getting some kind of compensation/encouragement for their hard work, but if it happens at the expense of availability and usability, it will drive some percentage of the userbase away entirely.

Edit: Poor spelling.

Dude · 07/23/08, 3:15 PM

Originally Posted by Malan

Is that planned to be java based for multi platform compatibility? (Mac user here)

the wowace thread said there would be a mac version as others have pointed out in this thread, however, java and .net versions would not be developed. They also said the mac version would not be developed right away and would probably not be ported until after the initial beta trial period. The Linux version would only be developed if there was enough demand for it.

I recommend the mac and linux users start sending email to the developers and let them know that WE are in need of this service as well as the pc users. Kaelten is the owner and administrator at wowace.com.

• Glaurong · 07/23/08, 4:05 PM

Originally Posted by Calen

One of the displeasing changes in my mind is that with the 'author rewards' program that Curse will be providing, addon authors that embrace the wowace->curse transition will want to be rewarded.. which is to say, they will want to have as many downloads of their addons happen directly from Curse.com so they benefit.

To that end, I expect that most these authors will request that their addons are never re-hosted anywhere else, period. It seems unlikely that there will be any serious repercussions for someone in your (or my) situation, where we might want to provide a more private download source for the addons we recommend, but I don't feel very happy about the idea of going against the authors wishes, or being tied to curse as the only source for addons, given possible uptime issues, etc etc.

Don't get me wrong - I see no problem with authors getting some kind of compensation/encouragement for their hard work, but if it happens at the expense of availability and usability, it will drive some percentage of the userbase away entirely.

Edit: Poor spelling.

No doubt, I've never been a fan of the business model so many internet services fall into (Free, find out it isn't feasible, try to charge, fail). Users simply move on to the next big thing, someone else doing it for free because they got fed up/frustrated with the crap you were charging for.

Edit:

Originally Posted by koaschten

The point is, the backend is already running on curse.com servers. Kaelten would have a big hole in his pockets by now. He mentioned traffic in the regions of 30-60 TERABYTE a month only for files.wowace.com and easily capping a Gbit link on patchdays.

On a related note, why hasn't any mod hosting site taken a cue from Blizzard's patch distribution model? Instead of offering direct downloads, sites like curse could offer .torrent files and some seeds. It is silly to push 60 terabytes a month if you don't have to. Sufficient seeding would handle small mods with only a few downloads and just via the nature of torrents the more popular mods generate their own bandwidth.

Fcukstar · 07/23/08, 5:12 PM

This is interesting, and quite frankly, a little unsettling for myself. I've become so dependent on WoWAce mods over the last few months, and I make it a habit to run the WAU every day to make sure I'm up to date. It certainly made it much easier for me to update after a large patch. I have to say, I hope Curse realizes the importance of allowing the new client to work for Macs. Since they have the opportunity to make something from scratch, they should make it available to as many people as possible from the beginning by using a cross-platform source. It would be easier than deciding "we need it on x system now, but it would require an entire rewrite."

I suppose in the end we'll be getting most of our same Ace mods, but the Curse client will also be great because there are certain non-Ace mods that I almost never update simply because I've become much too reliant on the WAU, ie: Auctioneer, Examiner, Opie, Questhelper, etc.

It will be interesting to see how everything unfolds.

◊ Vain · 07/23/08, 5:21 PM

I would be happy to pay a small fee to use files.wowace.com, if that's what it takes, because it is a useful service. However, under no circumstances am I going to be running auto-updater .exe files, that do who knows what, and have contained trojans in the past.

If the choice is "You either run our auto-updater .exe or you get nothing", then I am going to go with the latter and get my addons elsewhere.

◊ Birdemani · 07/23/08, 5:28 PM

Originally Posted by ckknight

The new client is written in C++ and wxWidgets, so yes, there will be a Mac version.

If there is enough demand, a Linux version may also be created.

Hopefully it will be nothing like the current Curse client. I never knew what it was looking at, what it was doing or what it was changing. Plus it never ran all that well on Vista 64 and the UAC caught it doing all sorts of odd things (randomly asking for access to my hard drive when I wasn't using it). There is no reason why the Curse addon needed to look at my WOW Cache just so it could populate WOWDB faster than WoWhead. (And having Curse people spamming me on PTR to install the client just for that purpose didn't help either) If it comes close to that, I guess I will have to go back to the old way of updating addons. I really enjoyed the level of control the WAU gave me.

As mentioned above, I question what level of trust I can give to Curse and not sure I want to.

Speaking of Vista 64, will it work there as well? Personally I would prefer to see a web based client if that was at all possible as my past experience with a Curse exe gives me virtual hives.

So what happens with lib development now?